Goodfellas : "1. Never rat on your friends, and …"

. . . 2. Always keep your mouth shut."

Am I an idiot, but aren't these "two greatest things in life" mutually exclusive? I mean, if you're goint to always keep your mouth shut, then how can you ever rat on your friends?

Or is that the point, that Jimmy Conway is actually an idiot, and that I'm an even bigger idiot for thinking that these are two separate things?




I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.

Maybe the second one is to emphasize the point of the first one or else the first one means to the cops and the second one means to everyone else.
Like:
1: Don't tell the cops.
2: Don't tell anyone else what you do even to your wife, best friends, etc.

What I wonder about this rule, is what if your life is on the line such as Henry?
Other mobsters may be angry at him for turning in his friends but what else was he supposed to do? Let himself be killed instead of talking to save his life?
Hard to blame him for ratting out.
Plus it removes that scum off the streets and potentially saves more lives down the line.

Humans are not the only species on earth.
We just act like it.

Scum? Don't you have a certain respect, admiration for the mob? I mean, mostly, they're just killing themselves off, or others who are mixed up in the underworld. It's not like they're out knocking off civilians for fun, y'know.




I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.

---

It's not like they're out knocking off civilians for fun, y'know.

---

According to Henry, Tommy did.
And I've heard of another mob hit man who killed a bystander because he wanted to test out a cross bow.

Humans are not the only species on earth.
We just act like it.

---

Scum? Don't you have a certain respect, admiration for the mob?

---

I tend to view the Mob in the same way I view corrupt politicians or other government officials. Essentially, they're people with power who abuse their authority. They take more from society than they give back and left things much worse.

New York City, by the 1970s, was a sewer pit facing bankruptcy. That's what happens when you allow corrupt mobsters to control things for decades and run the city into the ground. The dismal state of cities like Detroit can also be blamed on the Mob and their activities. A lot of those eastern cities which were controlled by the Mob during much of the 20th century are nothing but empty shells now - shadows of their former glory.

The Mob ruined America - far more than any of our external "enemies" ever could have dreamed.

Aw, I like the mob. No, not because of their wonderful contributions to society. They afford us a "what if" look into an alternate world where problems are solved by violence as opposed to law. As a former lawyer, I find that fascinating.

Plus, they always have such good food, so there's that.

And of course, I'm totally kidding. I am exclusively talking about the depiction of the mob in the movies that I enjoy.

A mob movie is very much like a Western. The stage is set; you know the rules on how things work. The stories play out in a universe that you're very familiar with. I don't care much for Westerns, but I do love me a good mob movie.





I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.

---

Aw, I like the mob. No, not because of their wonderful contributions to society. They afford us a "what if" look into an alternate world where problems are solved by violence as opposed to law.

---

I agree that there is a certain level of fascination one can derive from the mob. For similar reasons, many people might watch war movies or movies depicting evil regimes or individuals. Such as the numerous depictions of Hitler out there, which seem to generate a lot of interest and viewers. I don't think it means that people actually like or admire Hitler (some people might), but the fascination exists nonetheless. It might be similar with Mob movies, too.

---

A mob movie is very much like a Western. The stage is set; you know the rules on how things work. The stories play out in a universe that you're very familiar with. I don't care much for Westerns, but I do love me a good mob movie.

---

I think it might depend on the era it was made. Westerns made during the 1940s and 50s seem a bit cheesy, although so do Mob movies made in the same time frame.

I also think that Mob movies have a certain attraction in that they often portray the "establishment" as being just as bad, if not worse than the Mob itself. Those who are cynical about the police or the "Powers That Be" in society might see the Mob in a somewhat heroic sense, as they were able to beat the bigshots at their own game.

There's a certain "rags to riches" element where poor immigrants are able to rise to the top through their own gumption, drive, and ambition. It fits the standard "American Dream" narrative which still inspires a lot of folks. But it's also marred and tainted to some degree as well, especially when Mob movies show their "philosophical" side, as if to imply that there's something "deeper" and more "meaningful" to what they're doing. The rise of the Mob may be a testament to the notion of "style over substance." It may be that they have a certain kind of "style" which elevates them above that of "common criminal" in many people's eyes.

---

I agree that there is a certain level of fascination one can derive from the mob. For similar reasons, many people might watch war movies or movies depicting evil regimes or individuals. Such as the numerous depictions of Hitler out there, which seem to generate a lot of interest and viewers. I don't think it means that people actually like or admire Hitler (some people might), but the fascination exists nonetheless. It might be similar with Mob movies, too.

---

I view it as presenting a "what if" scenario for our lives. What if we lived in a lawless life like this? Could we live with ourselves if we did it? What is life like as a mobster? Goodfellas does an excellent job at answering these questions.

The Hitler thing is also interesting, and it's for similar reasons. Here is pure evil (although dogs supposedly loved him), but he's hamstringed by his own stupidity. What if he hadn't made all the blunders he did - wiping out the Brits at Dunkirk; using the Jews as an educated workforce instead of exterminating them; not attacking Russia, but instead consolidating his position in Europe. One thing you have to say about the Nazis - they sure looked good in their Hugo Boss-designed unifors. PR like that goes a long way! (And yes, I'm mostly kidding there.)

---

I also think that Mob movies have a certain attraction in that they often portray the "establishment" as being just as bad, if not worse than the Mob itself. Those who are cynical about the police or the "Powers That Be" in society might see the Mob in a somewhat heroic sense, as they were able to beat the bigshots at their own game.

---

There is some of that, but I don't think that's the main attraction. Obviously, we're just spouting our own opinions here, but I think the big attraction is living outside the law - doing whatever you want, and getting away with it. And yes, owning the police is nice, too.

---

There's a certain "rags to riches" element where poor immigrants are able to rise to the top through their own gumption, drive, and ambition. It fits the standard "American Dream" narrative which still inspires a lot of folks. But it's also marred and tainted to some degree as well, especially when Mob movies show their "philosophical" side, as if to imply that there's something "deeper" and more "meaningful" to what they're doing. The rise of the Mob may be a testament to the notion of "style over substance." It may be that they have a certain kind of "style" which elevates them above that of "common criminal" in many people's eyes.

---

The mob - or at least mob movies/shows - definitely show a certain style, what with the jewelry, the clothes - those collars! - the haircuts. But other than the language and the food (mmmm, gabbagoul), all that stuff is not only NOT an attraction to the mob, it's a detraction. People aren't fascinated by the mob because of their godawful style, but because of their lifestyle.

I think what elevates the Godfather movies, at least, what makes them, "deep", "philosophical", is that they are absolutely Shakespearean in extent. They are a psychological study of these "great" men (and women, if you include GF III, which I basically don't) - their rise, their fall, their motives, their betrayal, their revenge. It's fascinating!




I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.

Interesting comments about Hitler. If only we could go back in time and tell the Kaiser that economic superiority was the way to go and so much loss of life and property could have been avoided on all sides. Central Europe by this point in time could have been the economic center point of the world if diplomacy could have prevailed.

---

I view it as presenting a "what if" scenario for our lives. What if we lived in a lawless life like this? Could we live with ourselves if we did it? What is life like as a mobster? Goodfellas does an excellent job at answering these questions.

The Hitler thing is also interesting, and it's for similar reasons. Here is pure evil (although dogs supposedly loved him), but he's hamstringed by his own stupidity. What if he hadn't made all the blunders he did - wiping out the Brits at Dunkirk; using the Jews as an educated workforce instead of exterminating them; not attacking Russia, but instead consolidating his position in Europe. One thing you have to say about the Nazis - they sure looked good in their Hugo Boss-designed unifors. PR like that goes a long way! (And yes, I'm mostly kidding there.)

---

Another difference is that, at least with Nazism, there is/was a certain ideological and philosophical foundation to it, rooted mainly in German nationalism which rose to prominence in the 19th century. Hitler made it far more twisted and evil than it should have been, but there was at least a philosophical basis for what he was doing.

In contrast, the Mob's "philosophy" was not unlike that of a schoolyard bully shaking down little kids for their lunch money. The Mob were content to remain bottom-feeders in someone else's pond, and that's really the main difference.

---

There is some of that, but I don't think that's the main attraction. Obviously, we're just spouting our own opinions here, but I think the big attraction is living outside the law - doing whatever you want, and getting away with it. And yes, owning the police is nice, too.

---

Except that, by becoming part of the Mob, its members voluntarily submitted themselves to a different hierarchy and different set of laws. As you noted in the OP, one of the Mob's main "laws" is "never rat on your friends" (aka "omerta"). But why would this be the central part of their philosophy? Does this imply that, deep down, the Mob is secretly ashamed of what they're doing? This would imply that they really couldn't do whatever they wanted and often had to hide and conceal who and what they truly were.

---

I think what elevates the Godfather movies, at least, what makes them, "deep", "philosophical", is that they are absolutely Shakespearean in extent. They are a psychological study of these "great" men (and women, if you include GF III, which I basically don't) - their rise, their fall, their motives, their betrayal, their revenge. It's fascinating!

---

It is fascinating; I agree completely on that point. There is also a certain level of historical value in studying the Mob's impact on urban America and its influence over American politics. But I can't say that I ever found their philosophy to be all that "deep." I suppose it might be related to the philosophies of capitalism and the American Dream, yet they are dark side versions of those philosophies. But it's also anti-patriotic, disloyal, selfish, narcissistic, and purely ego-driven. It seems that it revolves more around placating, appeasing, and pacifying the egos of individual mobsters than anything else.

There is something inconsistent about their philosophy as well. While they may operate outside of the law and can do virtually anything they want, they are still quite dependent upon the rule of law and the police to maintain the structure and order within society. To a large degree, they're still working "within the system" and are therefore driven to protect it. But at the same time, everything they do ultimately makes that system that much weaker and ineffective.

---

Another difference is that, at least with Nazism, there is/was a certain ideological and philosophical foundation to it, rooted mainly in German nationalism which rose to prominence in the 19th century. Hitler made it far more twisted and evil than it should have been, but there was at least a philosophical basis for what he was doing.

In contrast, the Mob's "philosophy" was not unlike that of a schoolyard bully shaking down little kids for their lunch money. The Mob were content to remain bottom-feeders in someone else's pond, and that's really the main difference.

---

Well, two things. First, the mob "philosophy", such as it is, if you can believe it, is broadly similar to the Nazis - that individuals aren't important. In the mob, the mob comes first - even before your actual family. There is a corporatism at work in both, in terms of the hierarchy, the leadership.

And the mob has the same nationalism as the Nazis, just with a different nation - Sicily. As Henry describes, he and Jimmy could never be "full" members, because they weren't fully Sicilian. There is a glorification of all things Sicilian in the mob, particularly, of course, the food.

But I agree - at heart, the mob is about getting money, however it is to be gotten. However, I disagree with this:

---

one of the Mob's main "laws" is "never rat on your friends" (aka "omerta"). But why would this be the central part of their philosophy? Does this imply that, deep down, the Mob is secretly ashamed of what they're doing? This would imply that they really couldn't do whatever they wanted and often had to hide and conceal who and what they truly were.

---

No, that's not it. I don't believe - from media depictions only, I don't know any mobsters - that mafiosos are ashamed of what they do. They not only like what they do, they relish what they do.

You are miscontruing or misapplying omerta. Omerta is the protection of the organization as a whole, not the protection of themselves individually. True, they are not supposed to discuss mafia business with outsiders. But "outsiders" has a very flexible meaning. Obviously, law enforcement were the key outsiders. But you sure could discuss it with your wife, your mother, and others who were imporant to you, if the Sopranos is to be believed. (Again, my only sources of "information" on the mob are just what I've seen in the movies and TV.)

---

But I can't say that I ever found their philosophy to be all that "deep." I suppose it might be related to the philosophies of capitalism and the American Dream, yet they are dark side versions of those philosophies.

---

I agree; I'm just discussing the scope of the story presented in The Godfather. There is no inherent, interesting "philosophy" that the mob presents other than that bullies are powerful and can get what they want. I just meant that the stories themselves within that universe are compelling.

---

But it's also anti-patriotic, disloyal, selfish, narcissistic, and purely ego-driven. It seems that it revolves more around placating, appeasing, and pacifying the egos of individual mobsters than anything else.

---

No, I disagree. Sure, it's anti-patriotic (look at how upset they all were when Michael joins the Marines), but disloyal? Nuh-uh. If anything, the mob is all about loyalty. That is what the hierarchy, what omerta is all about. You give your entire loyalty to the mob, and the mob takes care of you. And while, hell yes, it is narcissistic and ego-driven, it is not driven mostly by those things. It is driven by pacifying the egos of those above you in the hierarchy, and it is driven by pleasure-seeking, but it is also driven - to my mind, primarily - by rule-breaking. By being a separate society outside of polite society's rules.

---

While they may operate outside of the law and can do virtually anything they want, they are still quite dependent upon the rule of law and the police to maintain the structure and order within society. To a large degree, they're still working "within the system" and are therefore driven to protect it. But at the same time, everything they do ultimately makes that system that much weaker and ineffective.

---

Yes, and that is the point. The control of that other system, so that their system can operate to its highest level possible. I wouldn't say that they work within the system so much as they work to control "that other system" while still staying firmly within their own.




I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.

---

Well, two things. First, the mob "philosophy", such as it is, if you can believe it, is broadly similar to the Nazis - that individuals aren't important. In the mob, the mob comes first - even before your actual family. There is a corporatism at work in both, in terms of the hierarchy, the leadership.

---

I never really understood it that way, especially since the inner workings of the Mob tended towards treachery and duplicity. They'll turn against their own boss or even their friends if it meant more money and a higher position. It may be similar in Corporate America, where people will stab each other in the back to get up the corporate ladder. Even the Nazis had a good deal of infighting and backstabbing as they tried to move up their own ladder to the top.

---

And the mob has the same nationalism as the Nazis, just with a different nation - Sicily. As Henry describes, he and Jimmy could never be "full" members, because they weren't fully Sicilian. There is a glorification of all things Sicilian in the mob, particularly, of course, the food.

---

I don't know if what you describe is actual nationalism or more a matter of ethnic pride and a milder form of tribalism. I'll admit that I'm a bit fuzzy on Italian history and the circumstances of their unification, although I know it occurred around the same time as the German unification.

I don't know if they're actually Sicilian nationalists or what, as they don't seem to support any independence or national political movements to speak of. I think Henry was saying that they needed to check a person's entire genealogy and family history, and they could only do that if they were from Sicily. I think the Mob also accepted some from southern Italy as well, as Naples and Sicily were unified for quite some time.

---

No, that's not it. I don't believe - from media depictions only, I don't know any mobsters - that mafiosos are ashamed of what they do. They not only like what they do, they relish what they do.

You are miscontruing or misapplying omerta. Omerta is the protection of the organization as a whole, not the protection of themselves individually. True, they are not supposed to discuss mafia business with outsiders. But "outsiders" has a very flexible meaning. Obviously, law enforcement were the key outsiders. But you sure could discuss it with your wife, your mother, and others who were imporant to you, if the Sopranos is to be believed. (Again, my only sources of "information" on the mob are just what I've seen in the movies and TV.)

---

Well, perhaps "ashamed" isn't really the right term. The point I was getting at is that they really couldn't do whatever they wanted, even if they were living outside the law. But it's not as if they're anarchists, who might live outside the law based solely on principle. For the Mob, they live outside the law or hide behind the law - whichever is more convenient for the circumstances.

I can see what you're saying, but from what it looks like, they're arch criminals who simultaneously want to be feared and respected, but also appearing as ordinary "legitimate businessmen" in the eyes of the law and the general public. This was touched upon a bit in The Godfather Part II when Michael says to Senator Geary: "Senator, we're both part of the same hypocrisy." The image of wanting to appear as "legitimate" was also something important to Michael.

All the "philosophy" is simply a smokescreen to cover raw ambition and lust for power no matter what the cost may be. That's nothing new in the human experience, I suppose, but in the end, all anyone will look at are the results of a given endeavor.

---

I agree; I'm just discussing the scope of the story presented in The Godfather. There is no inherent, interesting "philosophy" that the mob presents other than that bullies are powerful and can get what they want. I just meant that the stories themselves within that universe are compelling.

---

I agree that the stories are compelling. I don't think they're so much stories about the Mob but about America itself. They have made their mark on history and on the society at large. Of course, the same could be said about the KKK, who also had an interesting "philosophy," to say the least.

---

No, I disagree. Sure, it's anti-patriotic (look at how upset they all were when Michael joins the Marines), but disloyal? Nuh-uh. If anything, the mob is all about loyalty. That is what the hierarchy, what omerta is all about. You give your entire loyalty to the mob, and the mob takes care of you. And while, hell yes, it is narcissistic and ego-driven, it is not driven mostly by those things. It is driven by pacifying the egos of those above you in the hierarchy, and it is driven by pleasure-seeking, but it is also driven - to my mind, primarily - by rule-breaking. By being a separate society outside of polite society's rules.

---

Yes, but we're talking about an organization where the only effective way of rising to the top is by killing those who are already at the top. That's where the disloyalty comes from, since they'll turn on each other. After the Castellammarese War, Luciano set up a board of directors, but it wasn't like a single corporation - more like a guild or a cartel. And there would be rivalries, backstabbing, infighting, intrigue. They have to be ever vigilant, because they never know if someone might be out there gunning for them. They're not worried about the police, but about other mobsters who may not be as loyal to the organization as they are to themselves.

---

Yes, and that is the point. The control of that other system, so that their system can operate to its highest level possible. I wouldn't say that they work within the system so much as they work to control "that other system" while still staying firmly within their own.

---

True, although their control over that other system is only dependent on the system's viability. If they end up breaking the system by their own abuse, then they lose that control.

---

I never really understood it that way, especially since the inner workings of the Mob tended towards treachery and duplicity. They'll turn against their own boss or even their friends if it meant more money and a higher position. It may be similar in Corporate America, where people will stab each other in the back to get up the corporate ladder. Even the Nazis had a good deal of infighting and backstabbing as they tried to move up their own ladder to the top.

---

I think we're basically agreeing on ost things, just that we're splitting hairs slightly.
Yes, there is backstabbing in all organizations. However, in corporate America, it generally just isn't as interesting. With the mob, where there the backstabbing is literal, it sure is. Which leads directly into:

---

Yes, but we're talking about an organization where the only effective way of rising to the top is by killing those who are already at the top. That's where the disloyalty comes from, since they'll turn on each other. After the Castellammarese War, Luciano set up a board of directors, but it wasn't like a single corporation - more like a guild or a cartel. And there would be rivalries, backstabbing, infighting, intrigue. They have to be ever vigilant, because they never know if someone might be out there gunning for them. They're not worried about the police, but about other mobsters who may not be as loyal to the organization as they are to themselves.

---

Yes - I think the best way to look at is that they're loyal right up until they're disloyal. Loyalty is prized; but, of course, disloyalty - i.e., killing your immediate superior - is almost the only way to get ahead. (The other way is being a good soldier until you get "made".)

---

I don't know if what you describe is actual nationalism or more a matter of ethnic pride and a milder form of tribalism.

---

---

I don't know if they're actually Sicilian nationalists or what, as they don't seem to support any independence or national political movements to speak of. I think Henry was saying that they needed to check a person's entire genealogy and family history, and they could only do that if they were from Sicily. I think the Mob also accepted some from southern Italy as well, as Naples and Sicily were unified for quite some time.

---

Yes, I think everything you're saying here is fair. I agree that they're not exactly Sicilian nationalists, i.e., separatists - or even that there is such a movement. They are Sicily shippers/promoters; and yes, Naples and Sicily were unified as "the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies."

But it's not as if they couldn't trace your genealogy if you were from some other part of Italy. It's not as if it was just in Sicily that good birth records were kept - they were kept well all over Europe. However, I agree, other than other than that, that's pretty much the extent of their Sicily promotion. On the other hand, that's kind of like saying, "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?" That one fact is a big deal - you don't get made, you don't rise in the mafia, unless you're Sicilian. So Sicilian nationalism? No. But Sicilian support/promotion? Yes, all the way.

---

I agree that the stories are compelling. I don't think they're so much stories about the Mob but about America itself. They have made their mark on history and on the society at large. Of course, the same could be said about the KKK, who also had an interesting "philosophy," to say the least.

---

Oh, that's true, I would guess; I haven't thought of the KKK that way. BUT - the KKK stands for being racist f@cks. The mafia stands for stealing as much as they can for themselves. One is inherently, immediately offensive, no matter what the context; the other is intriguing, as a possible way to live outside of the "rules." Which brings us to . . .

---

The point I was getting at is that they really couldn't do whatever they wanted, even if they were living outside the law. But it's not as if they're anarchists, who might live outside the law based solely on principle. For the Mob, they live outside the law or hide behind the law - whichever is more convenient for the circumstances.

I can see what you're saying, but from what it looks like, they're arch criminals who simultaneously want to be feared and respected, but also appearing as ordinary "legitimate businessmen" in the eyes of the law and the general public. This was touched upon a bit in The Godfather Part II when Michael says to Senator Geary: "Senator, we're both part of the same hypocrisy." The image of wanting to appear as "legitimate" was also something important to Michael.

All the "philosophy" is simply a smokescreen to cover raw ambition and lust for power no matter what the cost may be. That's nothing new in the human experience, I suppose, but in the end, all anyone will look at are the results of a given endeavor.

---

Right, and I agree, they work both within AND without the system. They are all part of the same hypocrisy. Geary does it with a pen; Micahel does it with a gun.

But the fascinating thing these mob movies present is an alternative lifestyle - what if I made the choice to live like that? What if society actually accepted, tolerated the mafia - as it used to do (and who knows, still does?) in Sicily? What if I went down that road?

A small story to prove my point. I, of course, do have morals, do not commit crimes, never even think of committing crimes, and have always lived and played by the rules. I was on jury duty for the trial of the murder of one drug dealer by another drug dealer - 15 years earlier. The witnesses were all drug dealers - former drug dealers, who had now grown up and moved on with their lives. As shown in any such depiction (The Wire springs to mind), these guys would go out and "go to work" just like any normal citizen - except their "work" was committing felony after felony, dozens of felonies, every single day, for years. Literally THOUSANDS of felonies.

Think about it - here you are, in your nice cozy way of life, not committing a felony, not once, not EVER. And here they are, in an alternate life, just a couple of miles away from where I live, and their life is all about committing felonies, ALL THE TIME. Felony, felony, felony, as if it were no different than breathing. Whoa. What is that life like?

It is this insight into that alternate life that makes these mob movies so fascinating to me. And The Wire, too.




I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.

---

Right, and I agree, they work both within AND without the system. They are all part of the same hypocrisy. Geary does it with a pen; Micahel does it with a gun.

But the fascinating thing these mob movies present is an alternative lifestyle - what if I made the choice to live like that? What if society actually accepted, tolerated the mafia - as it used to do (and who knows, still does?) in Sicily? What if I went down that road?

---

I agree. This is an interesting discussion, by the way. I find that movies like Goodfellas and The Godfather get a lot of flak for what some people perceive as "glorifying" the Mob. Of course, it's complicated when one looks at how "society" views criminality while trying to hide many of its own sins, as exemplified in the scene with Senator Geary and Michael Corleone. Or this little exchange between Michael and Kay:

---

MICHAEL

My father's no different than any other powerful man --
(then, after Kay laughs)
-- Any man who's responsible for other people. Like a senator or a president.

KAY

You know how naive you sound?

MICHAEL

Why?

KAY

Senators and presidents don't have men killed...

MICHAEL

Oh -- who's being naïve, Kay?

---

This makes it difficult to actually "judge" the Mob according to the same standards and principles by which society judges the Mob. At least in terms of violence, corruption, and greed, it would be hypocritical for the establishment to condemn the Mob on that basis.

However, I would also look at the results of what they did and the overall legacy they leave to society. We can take a similar approach with the robber-barons and railroaders of yesteryear who were quite malicious, greedy, corrupt, and even cruel in their approach to business - not much different from the Mob's tactics.

But the difference is that, in the process, America got railroads and industrial development which led to much bigger and better things for this country. If we're evaluating the results of what they did, then one could argue that they still achieved a net benefit for society overall, even despite the negatives and their profound moral failings.

With the Mob, one can't really say that. While I would not minimize or dismiss the horrors of slavery, at least on a practical level, I can see that cotton is still a far more useful resource to society than cocaine (or gambling or liquor or prostitution, for that matter).

So, my point here is that if the morality of the establishment and the morality of the Mob are considered to be on the same level, then it may be problematic to try to judge the Mob on that basis. However, if the "morality" on both sides cancels each other out, then all we're left with are the results of their respective endeavors.

Another example might be how some people consider oil companies and their executives to be scum, for price-gouging and environmental irresponsibility (not to mention the wars they cause). But then, I also have to admit that, as a society, we depend upon and need the product they're selling. There is still a benefit to society by having access to this product and the ability to use it for productive purposes.

It's in this area where the Mob fails miserably, since they're only preying upon people's weaknesses and propensity towards vice. Their only real advantage is that they're dealing in products and services which society considers immoral and therefore outlaws them. And yet, so many people flout those laws in pursuit of these products, while so many in high places are paid to look the other way.

The whole thing is not just a matter of being part of a hypocrisy. When looking at how society has engaged in the War on Drugs and other campaigns against vice, it's turned into a fiasco and an embarrassment to the country.

---

A small story to prove my point. I, of course, do have morals, do not commit crimes, never even think of committing crimes, and have always lived and played by the rules. I was on jury duty for the trial of the murder of one drug dealer by another drug dealer - 15 years earlier. The witnesses were all drug dealers - former drug dealers, who had now grown up and moved on with their lives. As shown in any such depiction (The Wire springs to mind), these guys would go out and "go to work" just like any normal citizen - except their "work" was committing felony after felony, dozens of felonies, every single day, for years. Literally THOUSANDS of felonies.

---

Yeah, I have similar stories of being somewhat "on the periphery," so to speak. When I was a kid, I used to work in a hotel that sometimes would have some shady characters come through. I was kind of sweet on one of the maids who worked at the hotel, but I was devastated when she ended up going off with one guest who was a cocaine smuggler and making money hand over fist. She was seduced by the idea of being a coke whore, while I was just a dumb kid without a penny to my name. It was the 1980s.

I'll admit that I've tried cocaine and have had friends who were "deeper" into that whole thing than I was. I can see how it's so seductive and how it can mess with one's mind. Plus, there would be movies like Scarface, where we see Al Pacino living in a palatial mansion with piles of cocaine on his desk. Some of the circles I ran with back then, some guys would look at that scene and think "Man, that would be so cool."

I've known guys who had the same mentality as Henry Hill, which is why the sequence at the end of Goodfellas showing Henry's cocaine crash-and-burn has been a bit troubling for me to watch.

---

Think about it - here you are, in your nice cozy way of life, not committing a felony, not once, not EVER. And here they are, in an alternate life, just a couple of miles away from where I live, and their life is all about committing felonies, ALL THE TIME. Felony, felony, felony, as if it were no different than breathing. Whoa. What is that life like?

---

Yeah, I suppose there's always a certain fascination at wanting to see how the other half lives.

At least regarding some of the drug dealers I've known from back in those days, some of them may argue that, even despite the illegality of drug dealing, it wasn't like they were robbing banks or burglarizing people's houses. Most transactions would go off without a hitch and be pretty routine. Of course, they tend to operate as if they're always under surveillance and try to use whatever countermeasures they can to maintain secrecy. They're suspicious of any vehicles near their residence, such as a work truck or delivery vehicle which seems to linger a bit too long in the area.

It is kind of interesting, since a lot of your basic "common criminal" types are generally not very smart. But it's the smart ones - the ones who are clever enough to outfox the authorities - that's what is interesting. Just like a game of cat and mouse.

Not "mutually exclusive", but rather tautological.

Mutually exclusive means the opposite of the point you're trying to convey.

108 193 23 8114 246* 47.73 22 42

Thank you, oh Grammar Nazi!

Semi-more-seriously, thanks. You're right.




I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.

Strictly speaking, it wasn't a grammatical error, but rather terminological.

108 193 23 8114 246* 47.73 22 42

I guess that makes you the Terminator, instead.




I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.